DISCUSSION

6.0
Office of the Superintendent of Schools
MONTGOMERY COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Rockville, Maryland

September 8, 2009

MEMORANDUM

To: Members of the Board of Education

From: Jerry D. Weast, Superintendent of Schools

Subject: Goal 2: Provide an Effective Instructional Program—Sequence of Accelerated

and Enriched Instruction

Executive Summary

Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) is committed to equity and excellence for all
students. Through a continuum of quality instructional programs and services, all students,
including students who are traditionally underrepresented in advanced-level courses as well as
those who are currently achieving at high levels, can expand their intellectual boundaries. The
Seven Keys to College Readiness reinforces the MCPS expectation that all students can succeed
in the most rigorous instructional program. Increased enrollment and improved performance of
all students in advanced-level courses is an important component of ongoing efforts to provide
an effective instructional program—one of five major goals identified in Our Call to Action:
Pursuit of Excellence, the MCPS strategic plan.

In the publication Aiming for Excellence: Gifted Program Standards, the National Association of
Gifted Children recommends that student assessment for identification “. . . is an organized,
systematic, ongoing process that seeks to identify student needs for purposes of matching
students to programming options.” Such a systematic approach for continuous identification and
matching of student strengths is essential. When combined with timely communication with
parents, monitoring of student progress, and implementation of services, MCPS can ensure that
every child is recommended for and receives the most appropriate instruction. This
memorandum provides background and describes development of a systemwide process that
ensures that all students’ strengths are identified, that they have access to challenging curriculum
and instruction, and that parents receive timely communication about their child’s instructional
program. This process will help meet the system goal of equitable preparation and access to a
rigorous instructional program.
Members of the Board of Education 2 September 8, 2009

Background

The MCPS strategic plan, Our Call to Action: Pursuit of Excellence, includes a key goal critical
for accelerated and enriched instruction, Goal 2: Provide an Effective Instructional Program. In
Goal 2, the milestone related to advanced-level instruction is “All schools will increase
enrollment and performance of all students in gifted, Honors, Advanced Placement (AP),
International Baccalaureate (IB), and other college-level courses, with a focus on improving
enrollment and performance of African American and Hispanic students.” Data points to
measure the success of this milestone include gifted and talented (GT) screening in Grade 2,
advanced mathematics proficiency in Grade 5, Honors/Advanced Placement, IB, and other
college-level course enrollment, and participation in and performance on AP and IB exams.

The strategic plan for the Division of Accelerated and Enriched Instruction (AEI) incorporates
the goals identified by system priorities as well as recommendations of the Deputy
Superintendent’s Advisory Committee on Gifted and Talented Education (DSAC)
(Attachment A). DSAC reported the need for improvement in the following four key areas:

• Strengthen accountability measures

• Improve and expand programs
• Implement systematic collection and analysis of data
• Provide all students with equal access to GT programs and services

Through significant support from the Board of Education, MCPS has made much progress
toward the goals detailed by DSAC as follows:

• The number of elementary highly gifted centers has doubled since 2001, from four to the
current eight sites.
• A second magnet—Humanities and Communication and Mathematics, Science, and
Computer Science—opened at Roberto W. Clemente Middle School in 2004, providing
the upcounty with services for the highly gifted.
• Three student-choice whole school magnets—Argyle, A. Mario Loiederman, and
Parkland middle schools—opened in 2005.
• A whole-school magnet opened at Poolesville High School in 2006 that includes courses
in the humanities, in global ecology, and a science/mathematics/computer science
program.
• Enrollment in IB programs expanded from 515 students in 1999 to 7,695 students in
2008.
• The William and Mary and Junior Great Books reading language arts programs are now
required at all elementary schools beginning in 2008.
• Five gifted and talented learning disabled (GT/LD) centers continue to provide a rigorous
curriculum for students.
• Middle school advanced courses are expanding to all middle schools. The Office of
Organizational Development (OOD) and the Office of Curriculum and Instructional
Members of the Board of Education 3 September 8, 2009

Programs provided professional development related to 25 of these advanced courses this

summer.
• During the summer, more than 860 middle school teachers and elementary Title I GT
teachers were trained on methods and techniques for rigorous instruction.
• AEI staff supported 173 schools in 2008–2009. Staff members taught continuing
education courses on reading and mathematics for the highly able learner, and led
professional development opportunities on the William and Mary and Jacob’s Ladder
language arts programs, the Junior Great Books reading program, critical and creative
thinking, and strategies for GT/LD learners.
• Staff members in AEI and OOD are collaborating to develop online learning resources
related to meeting students’ differentiated instructional needs. Learning modules on the
principles of differentiation, math labs that demonstrate differentiation in the mathematic
setting, equitable teaching practices, and using 21st century technology as a tool for
providing rigorous instruction are available to support teachers and can be found on the
MCPS website at http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/development/
resources/Differentiation%20Principles/player.html
• AEI staff members integrated the critical and creative thinking strategies of the Program
of Assessment, Diagnosis, and Instruction (PADI) into the newly developed integrated
kindergarten curriculum.
• AEI staff members collaborated with staff members in the Office of School Performance
to monitor accelerated and enriched services at schools and to identify schools needing
AEI support, observation, consultation, modeling, or training.

The number of MCPS students enrolling and successfully completing advanced-level courses
continues to rise. The following information is in accordance with the most current data
available:

• The percentage of Grade 5 students successfully completing Grade 6 mathematics or

higher rose from 43.1 percent in 2007–2008 to 48.8 percent in 2008–2009.
• The percentage of Grade 8 students successfully completing Algebra 1 or higher rose
from 56 percent in 2007 to 59.6 percent in 2008.
• Students from all 25 high schools participate in dual enrollment with local colleges or
universities, with a total of 2,167 enrollments.
• MCPS students continued to outperform the state and the nation, with 61.5 percent of
students in the Class of 2008 taking at least one AP exam.
• The number of AP courses offered in each high school has increased dramatically in the
past seven years. In 2002, one high school offered only 13 courses, the smallest AP
program in MCPS at that time. That high school now offers 23 AP courses, the average
number of offerings in MCPS high schools. Six MCPS high schools (24%) offer 29 or
more AP courses. The largest AP program includes 33 courses.
• Student participation in AP testing has risen countywide. In 2002, MCPS students took
13,189 AP tests; by 2004 this number had increased to 19,111. In 2008, 25,921 AP tests
were administered in MCPS, nearly doubling the number of tests taken in a seven-year
period. During the same time period, the number of graduating students in MCPS
Members of the Board of Education 4 September 8, 2009

enrolled in one or more AP courses during high school rose over 10 percent with the
greatest increases in participation among Hispanic (+15.6%) and Asian American
students (+13.0%). Students receiving Free and Reduced-price Meals System (FARMS)
(+12.7%) and English Language Learners (ELL) (+12.8%) services also showed dramatic
increases in participation.
• In 2008, MCPS students accounted for 33 percent of all AP exams taken by public school
students in Maryland and 1.1 percent of all exams taken by public school students in the
nation.
• The MCPS Class of 2008 had more than triple the national average of students who
scored a 3 or higher on at least one AP exam.
• The percentage of students earning a score of 3 on an AP exam or a 4 on an IB exam in
2007–2008 was 59.6 percent.

Issues in Accelerated and Enriched Instruction

MCPS begins identifying students who can work at advanced levels as early as kindergarten, so
that schools can provide an appropriate instructional program to meet students’ varied needs.
Small group differentiated instruction in advanced-level reading and mathematics are provided at
every school. Formalized screening of every child in Grade 2 and the opportunity for
rescreening and screening new students in Grades 3–5 allows the system to recognize students
whose performance, motivation, or potential indicate the need for accelerated and enriched
instruction and to match student strengths with instruction and programs that will support and
extend these strengths. With identification procedures in place, the number of advanced-level
options has increased and the number of students availing themselves of the advanced-level
opportunities has risen; however, issues remain. Despite impressive overall gains, success
remains inconsistent school-to-school, and African American and Hispanic students remain
underserved by advanced instruction. The schools’ processes for articulation to the next grade
and communications with parents about instructional programming vary, and no system is in
place to monitor whether recommended services translate to actual provision of services.
Systemwide professional development that builds teacher capacity to meet students’
differentiated needs is essential. The current budget challenges have reduced resources available
for meeting this need.

In discussions to discern how to address issues of consistent implementation of accelerated and

enriched programs and services, school staff members indicated that the label or lack of a label is
not the determining factor for whether a child receives advanced-level instruction. Math 6
enrollment verifies that students who were identified, as well as students who were not identified
GT, are completing advanced-level mathematics. Board of Education Policy IOA, Gifted and
Talented Education, does not require a label for students to be eligible to receive advanced-level
services. Rather, review of data indicate that greatest gains have come in areas that are carefully
measured and monitored, such as advanced mathematics levels in Grades 5 and 8. School staff
members also indicated a desire for professional development on providing rigorous instruction
and differentiating instruction to meet the varied needs of learners.
Members of the Board of Education 5 September 8, 2009

Expand Global Screening and Combine with the Articulation Process

To help address issues of equity and excellence, a systemwide instructional identification and
monitoring process is needed. Currently, all MCPS elementary schools conduct two separate
processes related to instructional programming for students: the global screening process and the
process for determining course placement and articulation. From February to May, schools
conduct the global screening of all Grade 2 students, which is mandated, monitored, and
reviewed by central services staff members. During this time, each school collects data about
each Grade 2 student, and a committee meets to: 1) review the data, 2) make recommendations
for services, and 3) identify students as gifted, not gifted, or in need of rescreening. Staff
members record recommendations in the students’ files and send letters to parents noting results
of the global screening process, including the GT decision. MCPS publishes a report of the
number of students identified as GT.

From March to August, all MCPS schools follow a process for determining course placement
and articulation for all students. At the high school level, the Honors/AP Potential Identification
Tool (HAPIT) helps guide this decision-making process; however, at the elementary and middle
school levels, each school develops its own system for gathering data and making instructional
placement and school scheduling decisions. While mathematics placement decisions are
monitored centrally at elementary and middle school levels (HAPIT and key data points provide
opportunities for central monitoring), the process for determining such placements varies from
school to school.

A systemwide process for student instructional program planning and implementation is needed
to ensure that every student is recommended for the most appropriate instruction and to ensure
that every student receives that level of instruction or a higher level of instruction. Expanding a
global screening-like process to Grades 5 and 8, and combining it with course placement and
articulation, will create a cohesive approach to data gathering and review, to making
instructional placement decisions and teacher assignments, and to monitoring service delivery.
Development of a reporting system that communicates recommended services and instructional
decisions to parents and the next year’s teachers will enhance collaboration among students,
parents, and staff members.

In 2009–2010, 25 elementary schools are partnering with staff from the Office of School
Performance, the Office of the Chief Technology Officer, the Office of Shared Accountability,
and the Office of Curriculum and Instructional Programs to develop and pilot the Student
Instructional Program Planning and Implementation (SIPPI) process with Grade 2 students that
will be supported with appropriate technology and will be composed of the following steps:

• Gathering data that best inform school staff members about the whole child—
Performance data, verbal and nonverbal cognitive assessment results, and parent and staff
survey responses will be gathered for review.
• Reviewing the data and making instructional decisions—School committees will
meet, review the data, and make and record data-based instructional recommendations,
Members of the Board of Education 6 September 8, 2009

including appropriate acceleration and enrichment or intervention, and will identify GT

students.
• Making articulation decisions—School administrators will better tailor instructional
schedules, ensuring that every child is appropriately placed.
• Communicating decisions—Decisions about placement and articulation will be
communicated through family reports and reports to next grade-level teachers prior to the
beginning of the next school year. This communication will allow parents to become
more engaged in student instructional programming and will allow the next grade-level
team to plan with committee recommendations in mind.
• Monitoring implementation—Use of technological resources to gather data and record
decisions about instructional placement and school schedules will allow for monitoring of
implementation of recommended services and verification that students are receiving the
appropriate level of instruction.

By expanding Grade 2 global screening to a systemwide SIPPI process and eventually extending
the process to include articulation from Grade 5 to Grade 6 and from Grade 8 to Grade 9, the
following goals for this project will be met:

• Students will be provided equitable opportunities and will be challenged by rigorous

instruction.
• Parents will receive a written report specifying their child’s instructional placement
recommendations in addition to the current letter identifying their child as gifted or not
gifted.
• A consistent process will be implemented to recommend students for courses/classes.
• Real-time monitoring of course/class placement will help schools ensure that students are
in appropriate instructional settings.
• A system will be in place to monitor additional advanced data points as developed.
• Data collected will be used to inform policy decisions concerning the GT label, as well as
to further explore whether students are equitably recommended for appropriate levels of
service and whether students equitably receive services recommended.
• The ability to identify areas of need and provide targeted resources and support will be
enhanced, allowing greater capacity to fulfill the monitoring requirements of Policy IOA,
Gifted and Talented Education.

Conclusion

The MCPS goal of providing all students equitable preparation and access to a rigorous
instructional program is at the heart of establishing an effective, systematic approach for
continuous identification and matching of student strengths with instruction. When combined
with timely communication with parents and professional development, this process will support
consistency of implementation and results among all schools, and will ensure the highest quality
of instruction for all students. In addition, the establishment of a system of consistent course
recommendation and service monitoring will provide MCPS with appropriate data to inform
future determinations concerning programs for all students.
Members of the Board of Education 7 September 8, 2009

At the table for today’s discussion are Mr. Erick J. Lang, associate superintendent, Office of
Curriculum and Instructional Programs; Mr. Martin M. Creel, director, Department of Enriched
and Instructional Programs; Mrs. Cheryl D. Pulliam, principal, Oakland Terrace Elementary
School; and Mrs. Kay K. Williams, director, Division of Accelerated and Enriched Instruction.

JDW:EJL:smw

Attachment
 Attachment A
Montgomery County Public Schools
AEI Strategic Plan Summary 2009–2011

Action DSAC*
Recommendation
I. Improve Accountability
A. Improve GT policy monitoring through alignment with the efforts of OSP to monitor schools. I a, I b
B. Work with OSP to develop key school data to publish regarding GT implementation, including participation and Ib
performance of students in advanced courses.
C. Develop performance criteria to evaluate key school-based staff responsible for service delivery. I d, II d
D. Update Policy IOA and Regulation IOA-RA. Ia, Ic, IIa
E. Develop new data points to improve monitoring and accountability of advanced level services provision. Ib, Ic
II. Improvement and Expansion of Programs
A. Combine and expand course placement decisions, articulation, and global screening processes to improve IV c
monitoring of accelerated and enriched services and programs provided to individual students.
B. Develop clear pathways to differentiated levels of service in Reading/Language Arts/English, science, and social II a, IV b
studies.
C. Review middle school humanities and math/science magnet instructional programs and make recommendations IIa
for improvement.
D. Review and revise Title I, PADI, and Wings Mentor Program to serve a maximum number of schools in need of II c
primary talent development services.
E. Complete and implement Highly Gifted Center curriculum. IIa
F. Complete and implement the Middle School Magnet Consortium program and curriculum. II d
G. Complete a whole-school magnet model for Poolesville High School (Grade 12 in 2009-2010). II b
H. Develop a strategic plan for expansion and implementation of IB programs. II b
I. Provide differentiated professional development opportunities for implementing accelerated and enriched II c
instruction in collaboration with OOD.
III. Systematic collection and analysis of data
A. Integrate data collected regarding accelerated and enriched instruction into individual student profiles provided in I b, III a, III b
my MCPS.
B. Include data on student accelerated and enriched instruction in parent reporting methods. I c, III c, IV d
IV. Equal Access
A. Review instructional practices and articulation procedures to ensure that institutional barriers to access are I c, IV c
identified and removed at all levels.
B. Review impact of Title I .5 position. IV a
C. Review access for GT/LD students through a program review. II b
D. Develop consistent methods for parent outreach to ensure that all families are knowledgeable about accelerated Ic
and enriched programs.
E. Review the application procedures for all test-in programs to ensure equitable access. I e, IV c

*DSAC = The Deputy’s Superintendent’s Advisory Committee on Gifted and Talented Education
 Attachment A

*DSAC = The Deputy’s Superintendent’s Advisory Committee on Gifted and Talented Education